Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [Meditation Society of America] Re: TRANSMISSION

Expand Messages
  • Reynold Wingate
    Can you please rephrase the last two paragraphs? I have read somewhere that when high-sounding words are abundant in writing, that s a sign the writer is not
    Message 1 of 22 , May 3, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Can you please rephrase the last two paragraphs? I
      have read somewhere that when high-sounding words are
      abundant in writing, that's a sign the writer is not
      very sure of what he is talking about. Good writing on
      spirituality should be simple and easy to understand.
      I am lost in the last two paragraphs you wrote. Sorry!

      Reynold
      --- Bruce Morgen <editor@...> wrote:

      ---------------------------------
      Reynold Wingate wrote:

      >Jiddu Krishnamoorthy used to dissuade those who
      wanted
      >to become disciples.
      >
      Well, he tried to do it --
      unfortunately, after he
      died he became the nexus
      of YAPBC (Yet Another
      Posthumous Bhakti Cult).

      >He believed the spiritual path o
      >each individual is different.
      >
      That's a fact, no belief
      is required.

      >A guru can only give
      >general tips to grow spiritually based on his own
      >personal experience.
      >
      Yes, just as pointing at
      the moon isn't that same
      as being able to grab it
      and hand it over. ;-)

      >It may not necessarily work for
      >his disciples.
      >
      >
      Clearly, otherwise such
      "disciples" would themselves
      uniformly be realized.
      There's obviously no
      universal recipe for that.

      >I believe a guru is not an absolute necessity for
      >spiritual growth. If you have the desire deep in you,
      >you will stumble into the truth some day.
      >
      >
      As Jodyji himself has put it,
      the only actual prerequisite
      is sincerity. This brings
      energy and determination --
      but also an awareness that
      "the desire deep within you"
      may in fact be nothing more
      or other than garden variety
      ambition, abeit clothed in
      "spear-chill" raiment!

      Can we be both sincere and
      indefatigable in our enquiry
      without hope of status and
      attainment? Isn't that the
      subtly elusive "purity" that
      is so often spoken of among
      seekers, the surrendered
      attitude expressed by "Not
      my will, but thine" and the
      very essence of both honest
      enquiry and authentic
      meditation?


      >--- jodyrrr <jodyrrr@...> wrote:
      >
      >---------------------------------
      >--- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com,
      >jasonjamesmorgan
      ><no_reply@y...> wrote:
      >
      >
      >>Hello, hello,
      >>
      >>Put two glasses of water side by side, and the
      >>
      >>
      >temperatures even
      >
      >
      >>out. This is called resonance. If you want to
      >>
      >>
      >defute transmition,
      >
      >
      >>go to the local university, and prove the world
      >>
      >>
      >wrong.
      >
      >The Self is of nothing in this world. The laws of
      >physics do not apply, facile similes notwithstanding.
      >
      >Everyone is the Self. Nobody is "more" the Self,
      >despite what superstitious folk want to believe
      >about their gurus.
      >
      >The guru isn't there to zap you with shakti. That's
      >a myth some gurus use to make themselves popular.
      >
      >What a 'dispeller of darkness' does is illuminate
      >the thoughts of his/her devotees by pointing out
      >the Self in their awareness. It's not something
      >you catch vibrationally, it's something that's
      >suddenly apparent when it wasn't before. The guru
      >can make the connection for you, but you've got to
      >see it alone, completely outside any mythological
      >beliefs anyone has about gurus.
      >
      >



      ---------------------------------
      Yahoo! Groups Links

      To visit your group on the web, go to:
      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/meditationsocietyofamerica/

      To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      meditationsocietyofamerica-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
      Terms of Service.


      __________________________________________________
      Do You Yahoo!?
      Download the latest ringtones, games, and more!
      http://sg.mobile.yahoo.com
    • Bruce Morgen
      ... I could, but with all due respect, I ll decline that request at his time. ... An absurd contention imo, especially given that there is no consensus on what
      Message 2 of 22 , May 4, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        Reynold Wingate wrote:

        >Can you please rephrase the last two paragraphs?
        >
        I could, but with all due
        respect, I'll decline that
        request at his time.

        >I
        >have read somewhere that when high-sounding words are
        >abundant in writing, that's a sign the writer is not
        >very sure of what he is talking about.
        >
        An absurd contention imo,
        especially given that
        there is no consensus on
        what "high-sounding"
        means.

        >Good writing on
        >spirituality should be simple and easy to understand.
        >
        >
        Well, that certainly puts
        a good deal of what the
        ancients wrote out of the
        running, doesn't it?

        >I am lost in the last two paragraphs you wrote. Sorry!
        >
        >
        Me too -- but there it is.
        Are you sure you're not
        being a bit lazy in your
        approach? I can see only
        one or two words in those
        paragraphs that are all
        that uncommon, and the
        sentences parse pretty
        easily. The gists of both
        are quite simple and I'd be
        glad to discuss whatever
        specifics are eluding you.

        Thank you for your interest!

        >Reynold
        >--- Bruce Morgen <editor@...> wrote:
        >
        >---------------------------------
        >Reynold Wingate wrote:
        >
        >
        >
        >>Jiddu Krishnamoorthy used to dissuade those who
        >>
        >>
        >wanted
        >
        >
        >>to become disciples.
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >Well, he tried to do it --
        >unfortunately, after he
        >died he became the nexus
        >of YAPBC (Yet Another
        >Posthumous Bhakti Cult).
        >
        >
        >
        >>He believed the spiritual path o
        >>each individual is different.
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >That's a fact, no belief
        >is required.
        >
        >
        >
        >>A guru can only give
        >>general tips to grow spiritually based on his own
        >>personal experience.
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >Yes, just as pointing at
        >the moon isn't that same
        >as being able to grab it
        >and hand it over. ;-)
        >
        >
        >
        >>It may not necessarily work for
        >>his disciples.
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >Clearly, otherwise such
        >"disciples" would themselves
        >uniformly be realized.
        >There's obviously no
        >universal recipe for that.
        >
        >
        >
        >>I believe a guru is not an absolute necessity for
        >>spiritual growth. If you have the desire deep in you,
        >>you will stumble into the truth some day.
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >As Jodyji himself has put it,
        >the only actual prerequisite
        >is sincerity. This brings
        >energy and determination --
        >but also an awareness that
        >"the desire deep within you"
        >may in fact be nothing more
        >or other than garden variety
        >ambition, abeit clothed in
        >"spear-chill" raiment!
        >
        >Can we be both sincere and
        >indefatigable in our enquiry
        >without hope of status and
        >attainment? Isn't that the
        >subtly elusive "purity" that
        >is so often spoken of among
        >seekers, the surrendered
        >attitude expressed by "Not
        >my will, but thine" and the
        >very essence of both honest
        >enquiry and authentic
        >meditation?
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >>--- jodyrrr <jodyrrr@...> wrote:
        >>
        >>---------------------------------
        >>--- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com,
        >>jasonjamesmorgan
        >><no_reply@y...> wrote:
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >>>Hello, hello,
        >>>
        >>>Put two glasses of water side by side, and the
        >>>
        >>>
        >>>
        >>>
        >>temperatures even
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >>>out. This is called resonance. If you want to
        >>>
        >>>
        >>>
        >>>
        >>defute transmition,
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >>>go to the local university, and prove the world
        >>>
        >>>
        >>>
        >>>
        >>wrong.
        >>
        >>The Self is of nothing in this world. The laws of
        >>physics do not apply, facile similes notwithstanding.
        >>
        >>Everyone is the Self. Nobody is "more" the Self,
        >>despite what superstitious folk want to believe
        >>about their gurus.
        >>
        >>The guru isn't there to zap you with shakti. That's
        >>a myth some gurus use to make themselves popular.
        >>
        >>What a 'dispeller of darkness' does is illuminate
        >>the thoughts of his/her devotees by pointing out
        >>the Self in their awareness. It's not something
        >>you catch vibrationally, it's something that's
        >>suddenly apparent when it wasn't before. The guru
        >>can make the connection for you, but you've got to
        >>see it alone, completely outside any mythological
        >>beliefs anyone has about gurus.
        >>
        >>
        >>
      • jodyrrr
        ... But the obviousness of duality does not include the reality of the magical nonsense which exists in spiritual culture, the nonsense you are taking for
        Message 3 of 22 , May 4, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, jasonjamesmorgan
          <no_reply@y...> wrote:
          >
          > >
          > > The Self is of nothing in this world. The laws of
          > > physics do not apply, facile similes notwithstanding.
          > >
          > > Everyone is the Self. Nobody is "more" the Self,
          > > despite what superstitious folk want to believe
          > > about their gurus.
          > >
          > > The guru isn't there to zap you with shakti. That's
          > > a myth some gurus use to make themselves popular.
          > >
          > > What a 'dispeller of darkness' does is illuminate
          > > the thoughts of his/her devotees by pointing out
          > > the Self in their awareness. It's not something
          > > you catch vibrationally, it's something that's
          > > suddenly apparent when it wasn't before. The guru
          > > can make the connection for you, but you've got to
          > > see it alone, completely outside any mythological
          > > beliefs anyone has about gurus.
          >
          > Well, well,
          >
          > Your a bit father off than I originally thought. I see you are still
          > doing your sadhana to the end of savikalpa samadhi. For if you were
          > realized, you would know that duality is obvious and apparent and
          > GOD. You have not realized, as you denie one side of the coin.

          But the obviousness of duality does not include the reality
          of the magical nonsense which exists in spiritual culture,
          the nonsense you are taking for fact. The nonsense which
          chokes the life out of realization like algae in a pond.

          > A person can send prana to wherever, whenever they choose.

          Sure, as a intellectual conceit or in a dream.

          > So sad, so close, but to stubborn in his sadhana to drop the concept
          > of no concepts.

          The same is said of you, unable to see the truth that sits
          on the end of your nose.

          > I grow bored of this. Maybe I will be back next year. My compassion
          > might bring forth a thought or two for you. Ta Ta.
          >
          > Namaste
          > Om Namah Shivaya

          How generous. Don't let the door hit you in
          the ass.
        • Jeff Belyea
          ... Yes, we can. When the enquiry comes from a place of despair, degradation, shame and guilt, and the hope is for release from their grip, neither purity nor
          Message 4 of 22 , May 5, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            > Can we be both sincere and
            > indefatigable in our enquiry
            > without hope of status and
            > attainment?

            Yes, we can. When the enquiry
            comes from a place of despair,
            degradation, shame and guilt,
            and the hope is for release
            from their grip, neither purity
            nor status nor attainment are
            the foci - unless you are
            going to quibble that attainment
            of peace of mind is to be
            counted among "attainments".
            It is gift. The fact that
            IT grants purity does not
            count, either. The POM and
            purity are totally Jackerjacks'
            surprises. (Just a little
            anticipatory fencing
            before the touche).

            The awakening in this context
            is a startling and unexpected
            helping of jimmies, a cherry
            on top, a...lot of sweetness,
            and frequently gives birth to
            a Bhakti Yogi - a gratitude
            attitude for the double scoop.

            The fact that reports of
            this unique solution are
            often couched in spiritual
            terms may be the result of
            a family tradition or a
            cultural prime coat.

            Some will hear the reports
            of spiritual enlightenment
            as ego aggrandizement and
            attempts to attain status
            or imply some attainment
            of a lofty estate. But the
            Bhakti Yogi has no such
            interests.

            To those, like Jodi, for
            whom it was more of an
            "Oh, yeah, now I see it,"
            and life goes on, there
            are typically no jimmies,
            no cherries, but a sweetness
            nevertheless. Even Greg
            uses the words "sweetness
            and light" in his report.

            (Sorry, Michael.)

            Sweet as ever,

            Jeff
          • Greg Goode
            ... ===These are good points. Sincerely and singlemindedly trying to end one s suffering is not the same as going for the status of having attained a goal.
            Message 5 of 22 , May 5, 2005
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff Belyea"
              <jeff@m...> wrote:
              > > Can we be both sincere and
              > > indefatigable in our enquiry
              > > without hope of status and
              > > attainment?
              >
              > Yes, we can. When the enquiry
              > comes from a place of despair,
              > degradation, shame and guilt,
              > and the hope is for release
              > from their grip, neither purity
              > nor status nor attainment are
              > the foci.

              ...

              > Even Greg uses the words "sweetness
              > and light" in his report.

              ===These are good points. Sincerely and singlemindedly trying to end
              one's suffering is not the same as going for the status of having
              attained a goal. When in the middle of great suffering, a person
              would gladly trade all chances of lofty attainment for the relief
              from suffering.

              I remember one AIDS activist mentioning that he visited some AIDS
              patients in the hospital. They said something that really made an
              impression on him. They told him that sure, they remembered the
              feverishly strong sexual compulsion they felt when they had sex all
              those times - unprotected. There's a sort of divine madness that
              takes over, seems like it will protect you. Now, they are
              experiencing the aftermath. They all told the activist that they'd
              gladly give away the sexual experiences they had, plus all hope of
              *ever* having sex again, if they could only be free of the virus now.

              In my case, I was intensely looking into the essence of my nature.
              What made me ME? What makes anyone what they are, and not something
              else? Where is my identity located? How is it carried? How is it
              *my* identity? Although this was not a painful inquiry, it was a
              constant one - yes, and it had a touch of sweet, light fascination.
              I was really in the grips of it. My head was in the tiger's mouth.
              I hadn't heard of any satsangs or spiritual groups doing this kind of
              stuff. There was no association in my mind of a level, status or
              endpoint to be reached. Because I had no acquaintances doing this
              kind of thing, I really didn't have a socially constructed notion of
              a kind of person to compare myself to, or "an after it is over." I
              was doing it in kind of an open and unknowing way.

              --Greg

              P.S. Plus, meditation helped!
            • jodyrrr
              ... wrote: [snip] ... Actually, the seeing of it was accompanied by the simultaneous dissolving of the idea of me as Ramakrishna terms it.
              Message 6 of 22 , May 5, 2005
              • 0 Attachment
                --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff Belyea"
                <jeff@m...> wrote:

                [snip]

                > To those, like Jodi, for
                > whom it was more of an
                > "Oh, yeah, now I see it,"
                > and life goes on, there
                > are typically no jimmies,
                > no cherries, but a sweetness
                > nevertheless. Even Greg
                > uses the words "sweetness
                > and light" in his report.
                >
                > (Sorry, Michael.)
                >
                > Sweet as ever,
                >
                > Jeff

                Actually, the "seeing" of "it" was accompanied
                by the simultaneous dissolving of the "idea of
                me" as Ramakrishna terms it. Watching that me
                dissolve was almost a shock, but it happened so
                quickly that there wasn't time for a reaction.

                This isn't to say I don't have a sense of "me,"
                just that its hold on identity was shattered, and
                has remained so ever since.

                I have to admit a sweetness as the result of this,
                although I'm still the same firey asshole I was
                before it all went down.

                --jody.
              • Greg Goode
                ... ===Yeah, that s just it. Even aging, the deaths of parents, friends, terminal illnesses, my wife going to federal detention for an indeterminate period,
                Message 7 of 22 , May 5, 2005
                • 0 Attachment
                  --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "jodyrrr"
                  <jodyrrr@y...> wrote:


                  > I have to admit a sweetness as the result of this,
                  > although I'm still the same firey asshole I was
                  > before it all went down.

                  ===Yeah, that's just it. Even aging, the deaths of parents, friends,
                  terminal illnesses, my wife going to federal detention for an
                  indeterminate period, not enough cash for her bail (no bail bonds
                  accepted for immigration stuff), $1200 phone bills, bleeding
                  rollerblading accidents, bike accidents, sprains -- all this isn't
                  separate from sweetness, space and light.

                  --Greg
                • de la rouviere
                  Dear Jeff, May I come in here with some kind of observation. ... comes from a place of despair, degradation, shame and guilt, and the hope is for release from
                  Message 8 of 22 , May 6, 2005
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Dear Jeff,
                     
                    May I come in here with some kind of observation.
                     
                    You said:
                     
                     >>Yes, we can. When the enquiry
                    comes from a place of despair,
                    degradation, shame and guilt,
                    and the hope is for release
                    from their grip,>> snip..
                     
                    Could it also be that this kind of suffering-based enquiry could have two rather distinct motivations: 1) the suffering coming from the things you pointed out above, and 2) when this kind of gross suffering has worked itself gradually out of the system there remains the pure suffering of duality in its most delicate form yet to be transcended? 
                     
                    I guess what I am suggesting is that there is the totally untrimmed tree to start with and all that is evident are forms of emotional, psychological and mental disturbances.  These no doubt form the bulk of the conscious experience of separation at that level of disorganization.  However, there comes a time along the path of self-enquiry where these things no longer distract the practitioner so heavily from inner silence and some sense of freedom from conditioning and shadow emotional stuff.  This in itself brings a lightness of being, but there is still the residual state of duality present, which could easily again be drawn into mere reactivity and mental distortion.  Yet, at this stage, one is no longer driven by the gross suffering of personal historical stuff.  What is on the table is just the mere sense of duality.  It seems to me that only when this has been recognized as suffering and ways have been found to transcend this fundamental inclination towards mere separateness, can the freedom of which you may be speaking reveal itself.
                     
                    Or perhaps we may be talking about different experiences altogether?.  It is really difficult to apprehend the very many manifestations of freedom from where people nowadays speak.  So many claim freedom and enlightement.  I often find it difficult to fully appreciate where they are coming from. In the olden days, and as tradition has it, practioners in the Zen tradition actually often left their teachers, or were sent away to other teachers to have the different levels of their 'enlightenment' verified, disputed, worked on etc. lest the student fools h/herself into truly believing they are fully enlightened while perhaps the finer points might still be missing.  As yet, we have no such kind of 'peer review' in the west relative to our enlightening experiences. So we all seem just have our own relative light to stand or fall by.  This may of course create some serious confusion for many  - and a ready breeding ground for illusion?
                     
                    Have a good weekend,
                    Moller de la Rouviere
                     
                     
                  • Jeff Belyea
                    ... have two rather distinct motivations: 1) the suffering coming from the things you pointed out above, and 2) when this kind of gross suffering has worked
                    Message 9 of 22 , May 6, 2005
                    • 0 Attachment
                      --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "de la rouviere"
                      <mollerdlr@t...> wrote:
                      > Dear Jeff,
                      >
                      > May I come in here with some kind of observation.
                      >
                      > You said:
                      >
                      > >>Yes, we can. When the enquiry
                      > comes from a place of despair,
                      > degradation, shame and guilt,
                      > and the hope is for release
                      > from their grip,>> snip..
                      >
                      > Could it also be that this kind of suffering-based enquiry could
                      have two rather distinct motivations: 1) the suffering coming from
                      the things you pointed out above, and 2) when this kind of gross
                      suffering has worked itself gradually out of the system there remains
                      the pure suffering of duality in its most delicate form yet to be
                      transcended?
                      >
                      > I guess what I am suggesting is that there is the totally untrimmed
                      tree to start with and all that is evident are forms of emotional,
                      psychological and mental disturbances. These no doubt form the bulk
                      of the conscious experience of separation at that level of
                      disorganization. However, there comes a time along the path of self-
                      enquiry where these things no longer distract the practitioner so
                      heavily from inner silence and some sense of freedom from
                      conditioning and shadow emotional stuff. This in itself brings a
                      lightness of being, but there is still the residual state of duality
                      present, which could easily again be drawn into mere reactivity and
                      mental distortion. Yet, at this stage, one is no longer driven by
                      the gross suffering of personal historical stuff. What is on the
                      table is just the mere sense of duality. It seems to me that only
                      when this has been recognized as suffering and ways have been found
                      to transcend this fundamental inclination towards mere separateness,
                      can the freedom of which you may be speaking reveal itself.
                      >
                      > Or perhaps we may be talking about different experiences
                      altogether?. It is really difficult to apprehend the very many
                      manifestations of freedom from where people nowadays speak. So many
                      claim freedom and enlightement. I often find it difficult to fully
                      appreciate where they are coming from. In the olden days, and as
                      tradition has it, practioners in the Zen tradition actually often
                      left their teachers, or were sent away to other teachers to have the
                      different levels of their 'enlightenment' verified, disputed, worked
                      on etc. lest the student fools h/herself into truly believing they
                      are fully enlightened while perhaps the finer points might still be
                      missing. As yet, we have no such kind of 'peer review' in the west
                      relative to our enlightening experiences. So we all seem just have
                      our own relative light to stand or fall by. This may of course
                      create some serious confusion for many - and a ready breeding ground
                      for illusion?
                      >
                      > Have a good weekend,
                      > Moller de la Rouviere
                      > www.spiritualhumanism.co.za

                      Thank you, Moller.

                      Of course, we can only
                      speak authentically
                      from our own direct
                      experience. And, yes,
                      this is a difficult
                      task - to communicate
                      our personal experience
                      clearly and completely.

                      The gradual working out
                      of the issues that were
                      the root causes of
                      suffering, either through
                      the grace of time or
                      with the help of a
                      therapeutic approach
                      is distinctly different
                      from the experience of
                      Enlightened Awakening, a
                      "stepping into perfection"
                      in which the startling
                      realization of "all is well"
                      presents itself, as if
                      beyond anything the mind
                      has previously thought
                      or imagined.

                      The latter mends the
                      illusion of separation
                      and sense of duality, and
                      leaves a residual sweetness
                      as an undercurrent of
                      day-to-day consciousness
                      (as Jody and Greg have
                      noted in recent posts)
                      that is above any and all
                      circumstances of life
                      events.

                      So many models attempt
                      to distinguish between
                      the therapeutic recovery
                      and the Enlightened, more
                      dramatic resolution of
                      suffering. And even these
                      have subsets. The savikalpa
                      and nirvikalpa, and then
                      sahaj samadhi, come to
                      mind.

                      The easing of suffering
                      through time erasure of
                      the sting, the temporary
                      Enlightenment of savikalpa
                      samadhi, and the seemingly
                      permanent shift of awareness
                      and Awakening to the
                      "Ture Self" of nirvikalpa
                      samadhi are neat distinctions,
                      but as you've written,
                      can cause a lot of confusion
                      and maybe even delusion.

                      Additionally, those who
                      feel compelled, or as
                      Bruce Morgen writes, are
                      "choicelessly obligated"
                      to share the good news
                      of Enlightenment, seem
                      to innocenlty over-promise
                      the availability of this
                      New Wisdom, Understanding,
                      Experiential Knowledge.

                      The Big Guys of Gurudom,
                      and the relatively unknown
                      Awakened Teachers, seem
                      to all offer a model or
                      point to a path that they
                      walked, with the expectation
                      that a similar walk will
                      produce a similar result.

                      As Bruce and Jeff Brooks
                      have written; if this
                      were so, we would have
                      millions instead of
                      hundreds of Awakened
                      Ones, Buddhas, Christs,
                      Krisnas, on earth now.

                      As for the much-hunted
                      deluded gurus, it seems
                      that this is a much-overblown
                      hunt. It is unimaginable
                      that anyone would step up
                      to the role without the
                      experiential knowledge -
                      for some power trip or
                      monetary reward. That
                      hunt is left for others.

                      Those who fire verbal
                      bombast at any talk or
                      writing of Enlightenment
                      are the more discouraging
                      and disparaging game in
                      my crosshairs.

                      Peace,

                      Jeff
                    • Jeff Belyea
                      ... Hi Jody - Thanks. The dissolving of the idea of me is one of those subtle and difficult to describe aspects of Awakening that has the rational mind hear
                      Message 10 of 22 , May 9, 2005
                      • 0 Attachment
                        --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "jodyrrr"
                        <jodyrrr@y...> wrote:
                        > --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff Belyea"
                        > <jeff@m...> wrote:
                        >
                        > [snip]
                        >
                        > > To those, like Jody, for
                        > > whom it was more of an
                        > > "Oh, yeah, now I see it,"
                        > > and life goes on, there
                        > > are typically no jimmies,
                        > > no cherries, but a sweetness
                        > > nevertheless. Even Greg
                        > > uses the words "sweetness
                        > > and light" in his report.
                        > >
                        > > (Sorry, Michael.)
                        > >
                        > > Sweet as ever,
                        > >
                        > > Jeff
                        >
                        > Actually, the "seeing" of "it" was accompanied
                        > by the simultaneous dissolving of the "idea of
                        > me" as Ramakrishna terms it. Watching that me
                        > dissolve was almost a shock, but it happened so
                        > quickly that there wasn't time for a reaction.
                        >
                        > This isn't to say I don't have a sense of "me,"
                        > just that its hold on identity was shattered, and
                        > has remained so ever since.
                        >
                        > I have to admit a sweetness as the result of this,
                        > although I'm still the same firey asshole I was
                        > before it all went down.
                        >
                        > --jody.


                        Hi Jody -

                        Thanks.

                        The dissolving of the "idea
                        of me" is one of those subtle
                        and difficult to describe
                        aspects of Awakening that
                        has the rational mind hear
                        a metal-pipe clang.

                        That shift out of the personal
                        sense of "ego" to just "being"
                        brings the sweet relief from
                        taking anything personally, and
                        it not only allows for continuity
                        of the fiery asshole persona...
                        it transforms one predisposed
                        to being a fiery asshole
                        into a fearless fiery asshole;
                        taming the lions of fear and
                        doubt and replacing those with
                        a hot and sweet pepper undercurrent.

                        Love, as always,

                        Jeff
                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.